While you can clearly conclude that I believe the Deep State is very much real, it’s pretty great and astonishing to see that a majority of Americans (or at least people in the country) believe that the Deep State exists or that there’s a good chance it does.

Monmouth released a poll on Monday, March 19, 2018, and Politico reported on it. “Of the 803 adults polled, 27 percent said they believe the unelected group known as the deep state definitely exists. An additional 47 percent said it probably exists. Sixteen percent said it probably does not exist and 5 percent said they believe it definitely does not exist,” reads the Politico article.

Given the mountain of evidence piled to suggest and conclude that the Deep State does indeed exist (i.e. the Peter Strzok/Lisa Page texts, the Clinton campaign’s contribution to the Steele dossier and the multitude of people involved in the FISA warrant to spy on Carter Page just to name a few), I would only hope that a majority of people would be able to recognize the facts, even when the MSM tries to bury those stories or tries to discredit them.

This very poll, which has “a margin of error of 3.5 percentage points,” according to Politico, shows that the majority of the country does not buy into the idea that Trump is just some crazy conspiracy theorist who is paranoid that someone is out to get him. The majority of the country believes that there ARE people who are out to get the President, or at least undermine his administration.

But wait, there’s more. According to Politico: “Republicans and independents were more likely to respond that they believe in the existence of the deep state, with 31 percent and 33 percent respectively. Only 19 percent of Democrats said the deep state definitely exists.”

Let’s focus on that last statistic. 19% of Democrats said the Deep State definitely exists? That may not seem like an awful lot, but it’s actually a lot more significant than you may believe. That’s, honestly, a bigger number than you would think if you were to only watch the Fake News media. A fifth of the Democrats polled believe the deep state definitely exists. THAT’S HUGE AND VERY SIGNIFICANT!

Granted, I would hope that, as time goes on and more evidence comes to light to show that the deep state is very much real and is trying to undermine and take down a duly-elected President, that number would rise. But as it is, that number is a pretty good start.

But the poll doesn’t end there. It also talks about the government spying on American citizens. “Approximately 80 percent of those polled also indicated they believe the U.S. government is monitoring or spying on the actives of American citizens. Fifty-three percent said they believe the activity is widespread, and 29 percent said the monitoring is happening, but not widespread. Only 14 percent said they believe there is no monitoring happening at all,” according to Politico.

It goes further in this particular discussion: “Few respondents, or 18 percent, said they believe government monitoring is usually justified. Fifty-three percent, however, said that government is only sometimes justified and an additional 28 percent said it is rarely or never justified.”

On this particular issue, I’d have to align myself with that 29 percent of people who believe it’s happening but not widespread and that 53 percent of people who believe it’s only sometimes justified.

I don’t believe the government is anywhere near powerful enough to spy on absolutely everyone in the country. There’s simply too many people in the country for all intelligence agencies to be able to monitor. And I’m mostly talking about listening in on phone calls and using cameras on your devices to spy on people. I believe the government is capable of that, but not for nearly everyone in the country.

And when they do spy on people, I believe it’s only sometimes justified. There are some cases of terrorist sleeper cells being discovered and arrested, so I can see why it’s sometimes justified. But, obviously, it’s not always justified. We don’t want to be anywhere close to a 1984 George Orwell situation in the country. But there are some times when it’s certainly justified.

For all the times I’ve attacked the FBI, there needs to be a very specific point to be made. And that point is that I’m not attacking the FBI as a whole. By which I mean that I’m not antagonizing the field agents and those who are doing their best to actually keep our country safe from foreign and domestic threats. The people I’m antagonizing are those at the top and those who have some political standing or power - the crooked cops. People who allow their politics to cloud their judgment and drive their actions. People like Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, James Comey, Andrew McCabe and the such.

This, I believe, is something that really needs to be said. I don’t hate the FBI. I think that their usual, day to day activity is typically good for the country. What I hate are the cases in which people who should be impartial show Leftist bias and hatred towards a duly-elected President. What I hate is the corruption within the FBI, not the FBI itself. It’s the corruption and the conspiracy (as the Strzok/Page texts show they were trying to do) against Trump.

Regardless, what matters most here is what the poll indicates as a whole. It indicates that people are far more aware of things than you might think. It indicates that, despite the Left’s best efforts to convince people that there’s no such thing as the Deep State, people aren’t just going to take the word of these people. Of course people in the government will say there’s no Deep State. THEY ARE THE DEEP STATE!

And of course the MSM will tell people there’s no Deep State. In a way, THEY ARE PART OF IT! They may not be unelected officials dictating legislation, but they are willing participants in the reporting of fake news stories that are entirely politically charged and aimed at undermining, delegitimizing and defeating Donald Trump.

Granted, the media makes no effort to hide these intentions, but regardless of what they have to say, most people in the country don’t believe the lies that there’s not some sort of shadow government in play here. Most people are able to recognize fake news when they see it, at least when it comes to trying to disregard the notion of a Deep State.

So many people are able to recognize it, in fact, that even a FIFTH of Democrats believe that there’s a Deep State. Again, that’s very significant. While a majority of Democrats are still either oblivious of it or they refuse to believe anything that sides with Trump, there are enough out there who see things for how they are and recognize the corruption within our own government.

Overall, I’m very happy to see these numbers from such a reliable pollster. Again, if you were to go by everything the MSM is reporting, you’d think the world is on fire and everyone is dying. Reality is far different from the garbage these propagandists spew.John 8:32“And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

I suppose it’s only natural to circle back to some old excuses when you’ve just about run out of them as to why you lost something like a Presidential election. I’ve honestly lost count of how many things Hillary Clinton has blamed her election loss on, but we were bound to return to one of them. In this case, Hillary blames white married women for her defeat… again.

On a panel with the India Today Conclave, having been told that 52% of white women voted for Trump despite the Billy Bush tape, Hillary attempts to explain that “Democrats… have been losing the white vote, including white women. We do not do well with white men and we do not do well with married white women. And part of that is an identification with the Republican Party and an ongoing pressure to vote the way that your husband, your boss, your son, whoever, believes you should. And what happened in my election is I was on the way to winning white women until… [James] Comey dropped that ill-advised letter on October the 28th and my numbers just went down… All of a sudden, white women who were going to vote for me, and frankly, standing up to the men in their lives and the men in their workplaces, were being told ‘she’s going to jail, you don’t wanna vote for her’… so it stopped my momentum and it decreased my vote enough because I was ahead, I was winning…”

First, I’m not surprised Democrats have been losing the white vote. Why? DEMOCRATS HATE WHITE PEOPLE! Granted, they hate everyone, but they particularly hate white people. Think about the very concept of white male privilege and white guilt. These are two LEFTIST tools against white people. They say that white men are privileged and their lives are too good and that they should feel guilty over the sins of white people (Democrats, actually) who owned slaves.

You have to be a massive moron to believe attacking that demographic in such a manner will earn you their vote. As it turns out, saying bad things about white people isn’t going to get them to vote for you.

Next, she mentions “an identification with the Republican Party.” What reason do women have to vote Democrat? After all, Democrats are the ones who want illegal immigrant rapists, child molesters and murderers to be here. Democrats want Muslim “refugees” to come here as well. A chart from Statista.com shows recorded rape offences in England and Wales from 2002/03 to 2016/17 according to police.

For a decade, from 2002/03 through 2012/13, the number of recorded cases went up by about 4,000; from 12,295 in 2002/03 to 16,374 in 2012/13. From 2012/13 to THE NEXT YEAR, there was a JUMP in those numbers of about 4,000; from 16,374 to 20,751. IN A SINGLE YEAR, THOSE NUMBERS ROSE TO MATCH A DECADE-LONG RISE!

But that’s not the worst part. From 2013/14 to 2014/15, that jump DOUBLED in size; from 20,751 to 29,300. Then, ANOTHER jump the following year to 35,798 and then YET ANOTHER to 41,150 in 2016/17.

In less than three years, the number of recorded rape in the UK has DOUBLED. Of course, the Muslim “refugees” aren’t the only things to blame here… the U.K. also has a severely strict ban on guns. Interestingly enough, fatal stabbings in England are at their highest level since 2010-11 and rape at knifepoint has risen by 23% in the past year, according to a Breitbart article released February 9th, 2018.

Is it a coincidence that Democrats also support strict gun control laws? I’ve already written another article about this, but I’ll repeat the point made in said article: Democrats are women’s WORST enemy!Why would they vote Democrat?

But returning to Crooked Hillary’s mini-rant about why she lost, she then proceeds to blame married white women for essentially voting against their will. How narcissistic is it of her to believe the female vote should automatically go to her just because she’s a woman? How sexist must you be to believe that? Women didn’t vote for Hillary because their husbands “charmed” or “insisted” they vote for Trump. They voted for Trump because, all things considered, he’s a far better friend to women than Hillary could ever hope to be. He doesn’t want to keep women unsafe and keep them from owning a gun. Hillary does.

He doesn’t want women to be unsafe from illegal immigrants and Muslim “refugees”. Hillary does.

Hillary isn’t a champion of women. Simply knowing what she’s done to Juanita Broaddrick and Monica Lewinsky should be enough to tell you that. What champion of women SILENCES the women that were ASSAULTED by her husband? What champion of women STAYS MARRIED TO A WIDELY-KNOWN RAPIST?!

Once again returning to the crazy lady’s rant, I find it amusing that she blames James Comey once again.While I do believe that Comey re-opening the case against Hillary hurt her numbers, it’s ludicrous to believe one single event like that caused her downfall. It’s not just the case, it’s her very own policy, ideals, her husband’s actions in the past, the Clinton Crime Family, Benghazi and her insulting words towards Trump supporters that snowballed and caused her demise. And that’s just from her part.

You also have to consider the insecurity of the DNC’s servers causing trouble for the Dems, the fact that Hillary rigged the primaries so she’d win (though at the time, there wasn’t as much evidence, it was just murmured and widely believed to be the case by even the Democrat base), and the disastrous 8 years America had to endure thanks to Obama.

Really, there are a multitude of reasons as to why Hillary lost and Trump won. Too many to write for the remainder of this particular article, so I’ll return to the criminally insane woman.

At one point, she went back to insulting Trump voters once again, saying that Trump voters and residents of heartland states are “backwards”, who “didn’t like black people getting rights” and “didn’t like women.”

Right, need I remind her that it’s her Party that fought for the “right” to own a fellow human being? Need I remind her that Lincoln was the FOUNDER of the Republican Party? Need I remind her that no black person was allowed to attend a Democratic National Convention until 1924? Need I remind her that Democrats largely voted AGAINST the 13th Amendment, the amendment that abolished slavery in the U.S.? Need I remind her that her very own MENTOR was a noted member of the Ku Klux Klan who once said “I am loyal to my country and know but reverence to her flag but I shall never submit to fight beneath that banner with a negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see this old glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimens from the wilds”?

And, finally, need I remind her that it was her Party that mounted to the relocation and even EXTERMINATION of Native Americans with the Indian Removal Act of 1829 under DEMOCRAT President Andrew Jackson?

Historically, the Democrats have been African-Americans’ (and all minorities', really) worst enemy. Even Obama was terrible for them with the insanely high unemployment rates and racial division between the black communities and law enforcement.

Hillary didn’t just lose because she was the worst candidate of all time. She also lost because she belonged to the worst political party of all time.

Even the Nazis, when shaping their Nuremberg laws, thought that Democrat laws against slaves were too harsh.

Proverbs 4:16“For they cannot rest until they do evil; they are robbed of sleep till they make someone stumble.”

Truth be told, I’m not at all surprised that the audience didn’t applaud or cheer for an actor thanking America in his Oscar speech, but I am surprised that even ONE of them did as much.

Recently, the 90th Academy Awards took center stage for… some people, as its ratings hit an all-time low. As expected, it was full of dumb political banter that only served to make the Hollywood elites and MSM happy while the rest of the people who dared themselves to sit through it simply groaned at the largest gathering of morons during the week.

The event was chock-full of conservative-bashing jokes, highly hypocritical “#MeToo” references, gun-control advocacy and a disgusting call for “unity” with “Dreamers” by a couple of award-winners. Now, I’m getting all of this from other conservative news sites; I didn’t watch the Oscars. That’s not to say I boycotted them… boycotting would mean that I ever gave even half a rat’s behind about the event and the people in it and had to struggle to keep myself from watching. People boycott the NFL because they actually care about football. People don’t boycott the Oscars because far fewer people could bring themselves to actually care about it.

But despite the expectedly high levels of celebrated insanity, one award-winner actually said something that I appreciate in his speech. That award-winner is none other than Gary Oldman, winning the Oscar for Best Actor for his portrayal of Sir Winston Churchill in the movie “Darkest Hour”.

Oldman began his acceptance speech: “My deepest thanks to the Academy and its members for this glorious prize. I owe this and so much more to so many. I’ve lived in America for the longest time and I’m deeply grateful to her for the loves and the friendships I have made and the many wonderful gifts it has given me: my home, my livelihood, my family, and now Oscar.”

He continued, saying: “The movies, such is their power, captivated a young man from south London, and gave him a dream…” before thanking family members and friends, prompting the audience to applaud.

He concluded his speech by saying: “I would just like to salute Sir Winston Churchill, who has been marvelous company on what can be described as an incredible journey, and my wife, Gisele, for traveling that road with me and being at my side… I would like to thank my mother who is older than the Oscar. She is 99 years young next birthday (triggering applause) and she’s watching the ceremony from the comfort of her sofa. I say to my mother, thank you for your love and support. Put the kettle on, I’m bringing Oscar home.”

Now, when it comes to thanking family, friends and the people working with you, it only makes sense for the audience to applaud that. It’s something just about everyone does and it’s an act worthy of applause. But the lack of applause when Oldman thanked this country for the gifts she has bestowed upon him highlights how much of the audience (not necessarily all of it) feels about America. Putting aside every other braindead joke that only people with equally low IQs would laugh at, that deafening silence describes just what they think about America: it deserves no such praise.

It deserves no such praise because of the very individual it elected into office. It deserves no such praise because of the constitutional rights it gives to every citizen in the U.S., particularly the 2nd Amendment. It deserves no such praise because of the “racial inequality” that exists in this country. It deserves no such praise because of the very perverts and sexual predators they heralded as gods until last year.

To them, America should not be celebrated or praised in any way unless it’s fundamentally changed to fit their desired mold. They want to be the only ones with a voice; the only ones with the weapons. Such is the state of their super egos. Everyone believes in something, whether it’s God, Allah, Buddha, or themselves. In this case, these Hollywood elites believe in themselves and themselves only. And not in the “just believe in yourself and you can do it!” type of belief. More in the “I’M A GOD! WORSHIP ME, FILTHY PEASANTS! WATCH MY MOVIES AND WORSHIP THE VERY GROUND I WALK ON!” type of belief.

Because that’s precisely the kind of belief it takes to advocate for gun control and confiscation in their position. They won’t be the ones to suffer from it. They have the money to hire armed guards. They don’t hate guns. They hate the idea of ANYONE ELSE having guns.

Much in the same way they “support” illegal immigrants. They declare they stand with them. And stand they do… at least 500 yards away from them… behind armed security… within their homes… which are surrounded by 10ft. walls.

The America they want to live in is the America where only THEY get to enjoy the fruits of capitalism while bad-mouthing it. They want to live in a socialist country while they live like capitalists. I believe I’ve said this before, but I’ll repeat it here: it’s the reason I don’t believe Bernie Sanders is a true socialist. A true socialist would be willing to LIVE like a socialist: dirt poor, down-trodden, bitter and angry at his lot in life, believing he should be given free stuff by the government. Bernie is bitter, sure. He’s angry, no doubt. He believes the government should give free stuff to people, utterly ignoring the economic aspects of such an act. But he doesn’t live dirt poor (he has a net worth just below $1 million, according to the Motley Fool). He doesn’t live down-trodden (he owns three different homes).

He speaks like a socialist while living like a capitalist. Much of Hollywood is the exact same way.Hypocrites, all of them, with a God-complex that makes them believe everyone should live exactly the way they say people should.

Putting the brakes on the Hollywood-bashing train, I would like to commend Gary Oldman for doing something no other Hollywood actor is ever expected to do: thanking America. And I’m not the only one thanking him for that. A myriad of other people on Twitter appreciated his gratitude for America, even if the Mainstream Media chooses to utterly ignore it.

“Finally someone on the Oscars thanks America for all it has done for them instead of slamming our country! Thank you Gary Oldman! Job well done!” remarked another.

“Gary Oldman finally won his Oscar and was the first person I’ve seen actually thank AMERICA!!!!!! Wooo you go man”

And finally: “Wow. Gary Oldman! Good for you for saying America gave you support for your dreams.”

The reason I mention that last tweet is due to the last part of it. America supported Oldman’s dreams of becoming an actor. If you ask me, THAT is a dreamer. Not the degenerates who have no respect for our rule of law.

James 1:17“Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.”

Taking a break from talking about the Parkland high school shooting, I want to focus on a rather intriguing and funny video depicting just how illogical and brainwashed some Leftists (more specifically, millennials) are.

Some time ago, Portland State University (a college I almost went to) held an event discussing the differences between men and women. The event was hosted by PSU philosophy professor Peter Boghossian and featured a biologist by the name of Heather E. Heying, writer Helen Pluckrose, and former Google engineer James DaMore, the very engineer that was fired by Google for writing a memo about the biological differences between men and women and women’s natural disinterest in engineering.

Now, the video below is nearly 2 hours long, but the most important things for this article occur between the 18 minute mark and the 22 minute mark.

Professor Boghossian begins by asking what “social constructivism” is. Helen Pluckrose answered, saying: “It’s the idea that all of our traits, our characteristics, abilities, cognitive, psychological, behavioral, are learned from societal norms; the idea that there can be innate or biological or inherited differences are dismissed. And so, we’re in a position where if there is injustice, or if there is an imbalance anywhere, sort of an inequality of representation, then the explanation for that can be the societal injustice.”

The professor then turned to Heying, asking: “What can we take from what Helen said to help us make sense of James’ memo?”

Helen responded with: “James argues, accurately, that there are differences between men and women. This is a strange position to be in, to be arguing for something that is so universally and widely accepted within biology. What is not as widely accepted is that culture’s also evolutionary; but I’m going to argue that both biology and culture are both evolutionary. Let’s look at differences between men and women that are explicitly anatomical and physiological; are men taller than women on average? Does anyone take offense at that fact? I would say you could be irritated by it; you could be irritated by the fact that women have to be the ones who gestate and lactate; you could be irritated by a lot of truths…”

It was at this point that snowflake millennials were triggered enough to up and leave the room.

Heying continued: “… but taking offense is a response that is a reflection of reality. So, men and women are different on height; they’re different on muscle mass; they’re different on where fat is deposited on our bodies. Our brains are also different.”

At this point, another enraged lunatic millennial knocked over something in the back of the auditorium, sabotaging the sound system. Due to that, security was called on them.

The video then cuts to the girl who destroyed the sound system being escorted to the lobby by security. She begins ranting, saying: “He’s a piece of s**t. That is not okay. Even the women in there have been brainwashed.”

Then another triggered snowflake said: “… should not listen to fascism. It should not be tolerated in civil society. Nazis are not welcome in civil society.”

Then, the triggered snowflakes left, with the vandal girl saying: “F**k the police! Power to the people!”

Which I simply had to laugh at.

I’ll get back to these idiots in a second. First, I want to mention what immediately followed inside the auditorium.

Professor Boghossian said: “All right, we’re going to raise our voices. The conversation’s going to go on.” Which prompted cheers and applause from the people in the audience who were mature and smart enough to stay and listen. He continued by calling out these hoodlums, saying: “Let me be crystal clear: that sort of behavior is unacceptable in civilized society (prompting more applause). And if that person is a student, they should be given a warning, and if they do it again they should be expelled from the university.”

I applaud the professor for calling out at least the vandal girl for the damage. It’s just as he said: that sort of behavior is simply unacceptable in civil society.

Which brings me back to the triggered snowflakes. I find it very amusing the things they said. The vandal called, presumably the professor, a “piece of s**t”. For what? Hosting an event that talks about reality. And, as we all know, these children are altogether allergic to reality.

She mentions that even the women in there have been brainwashed. Really? The biologist is brainwashed for speaking scientific facts? The writer in there is brainwashed for correctly defining the very Leftist mindset? And let’s not forget: this is Portland State University.

I used to live in Portland, Oregon. It’s uber-Leftist over there. Do you know what the city’s motto is? “Keep Portland weird.” As though normalcy is blasphemous and abnormality is to be celebrated. So I’m not at all surprised to see such idiots attending this college. What I am surprised at is the fact that the faculty (or at least the one professor) isn’t so Leftist (politics really didn’t play a role here, but these students made it political) and that he was realistic enough to know that there are biological and realistic differences between the genders.

What I’m surprised about is that they had speakers there talking about reality as it is, not as they see it politically.

Good on them for hosting this event to talk about reality.

But returning to the vandal girl, who’s the one who is brainwashed here? She refuses to accept reality and insults the people who try to explain it and goes so far as to deliberately destroy equipment used to talk about reality. She’s acting just like a good pawn for the Left.

Then, we have the guy that is literally calling them fascist and Nazis. He mentioned that fascists should not be tolerated in civil society. That Nazis shouldn’t be tolerated in civil society. Why is calling the very real differences between men and women a form of Nazi or fascist talk?It’s not. The only reason he says that is because he disagrees with what is being said. And anything that he disagrees with is automatically called fascism or Nazism.

These kids truly don’t understand what Nazism and fascism is. I’m a millennial myself but still have a better understanding of its horrors. I may not have experienced it (thank the Lord for that) but I know history. I know how horrible they are from understanding history. And I also know how Leftist these two things are.

Which is why I also have to laugh when the vandal girl says “power to the people.” What form of government gives power to the people? Communism does the literal opposite, as does fascism and Nazism. The three all derive from Marxism and all talk about a centralized state being in rule. So how is that giving power to the people?

For all the times that people like them call Trump a “fascist” and a “Nazi”, they are seemingly quite free to slander him and his name. Do you think they fear an occasion similar to the Night of the Long Knives, an operation by the Nazis to execute their opponents and consolidate Hitler’s absolute power in Germany? Do you think they fear Trump will have members of the police or military take people like Maxine Waters (despite how corrupt she is), Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, John McCain and others and execute them?

Do you think they fear he will do what Mussolini did when he took over the presses and had a prominent opponent of his (Giacomo Matteotti) murdered? Do you think they fear Trump will take over CNN and have Chris Cuomo killed? Of course not!

Despite the fact that they constantly call him a fascist, he’s the furthest person in Washington from fascism. From Nazism.

Let me tell you, those who support gun control are closer to fascism and Nazism than those who don’t. Those who support abortion are closer to fascism and Nazism than those who don’t. Those who support censoring people who disagree with them are closer to fascism and Nazism than those who don’t. Those who support increasing the size of the government are closer to fascism and Nazism than those who don’t.

These triggered snowflakes have absolutely no idea what it is they’re talking about. They speak as though they understand the world and everything in it when nothing could be further from the truth. They don’t just ignore reality, they flat out reject it. That much is evident by this video. They are utterly disconnected from reality and hate the very idea of it. They want to make their own reality and will likely die in the process (because you can’t live outside of reality), if cleaning detergent doesn’t kill them first.

After the most recent school shooting to strike at the heart of the country, Democrats and the Left as a whole have made sure to go after the people who are NOT responsible for this: the NRA and gun-owners/second amendment supporters.

They are very efficient in turning a national tragedy into a political game. And it’s sickening.

Recently, the Crappiest Name in News held a town hall meeting that was purely used as a means to attack anyone who defends the second amendment and was not meant to be a discussion of ideas.

But another event that occurred recently is the Conservative Political Action Conference, CPAC for short.

This event hosted a lot of conservatives from the President and Vice President to the leader of the NRA, Wayne LaPierre. He’s the person I’ll be focusing on most in this article.

LaPierre made the excellent point that we tend to secure a lot of things in this country, but children are not among the things we secure.

“It’s a bizarre fact that in this country our jewelry stores, all over this country, are more important than our children. Our banks, our airports, our NBA games, our NFL games, our office buildings, our movie stars, our politicians, they’re all more protected than our children in school.”

He continued with: “Does that make any sense to anybody? Do we really love our money and our celebrities more than we love our children?”

Again, this is a very good point. Why is it that every other government building is better protected than our SCHOOLS?!

Now, I know the Left’s position on this. “How dare you even suggest arming our teachers? How dare you suggest placing people with GUNS near our children? How dare you suggest we have metal detectors in our schools? That would turn schools into prison!”

All of these things are easily challenged. Why arm our teachers? Because they’ll be able to protect the children faster than the police. They’ll be able to shut down the attacker faster. If there even is an attacker in the first place. When was the last time someone attacked a police station? Or a prison?

Sickos like Nikolas Cruz, who hardly seems to even get any of the hatred from the Left, would be more hesitant to attack any place that likely has armed security. The reason shooters target theaters, churches and schools is because they tend not to be too heavily guarded by weapons, if at all.

If we trust teachers to teach our children, why wouldn’t we trust them to protect them as well? Why wouldn’t we trust them to protect them with their own weapons? But even then, we don’t have to arm the teachers. We could just have armed security as well who are payed by the school district to protect the people there, just as armed security in any other government building is tasked with protecting the people there.

But the Left has a problem with this solution, one: because it’s an actual solution and the last thing the Left needs is a solution to shootings. So long as there are shootings, they are able to shove their agenda down people’s throats. And two: because their issue is not the children’s lives, their issue is guns. They can’t begin to comprehend the concept of a good guy with a gun. To them, anyone who has a gun is a bad guy or potential bad guy.

When it comes to metal detectors, I’m admittedly more conflicted on this one. I don’t think it would be necessary to have metal detectors. Having armed security should ideally be enough. Considering most shootings happen with rifles, they’d be pretty difficult to conceal when walking into a school. Any posted security guard at any entrance would be able to see someone coming with a gun when they shouldn’t.

So metal detectors, I don’t think are necessary, but I’d still like to contend with the Left on this. I try to view things from multiple perspectives, so I’ll try to do that with this proposition as well.

Metal detectors would be an added security feature, for sure. What the Left says about it is that it would make schools look and feel like prisons. Aside from the fact that schools are already pretty similar to prisons in many ways (authoritarian structure, dress code, emphasis on silence and order, loss of individual autonomy, set times enforced for walking, eating, etc.), why would the way a school looks and feels take precedent over the safety of the children? With this argument, is the Left signifying that they care more about how things look and feel than they care about the safety and lives of children?

I wish it didn't have to come to these sort of proposals. I wish no one would dare attack a school. But we must face reality. These things happen, but we can take measures against them. We should act accordingly with things that will actually work, not gun control measures that won't help a single person.

Returning to LaPierre, he also points out that the Democrats “hate the NRA. They hate the Second Amendment. They hate individual freedom.”

“For them it’s not a safety issue, it’s a political issue. Their goal is to eliminate the Second Amendment and our firearms freedoms, so they can eradicate all individual freedoms. Their solution is to make you, all of you, less free. They want to sweep right under the carpet the failure of school security, the failure of family, the failure of America’s mental health system and even the unbelievable failure of the FBI.”

All good points which are all correct. The Left doesn’t want a solution to this problem unless it comes as part of a nationwide guns confiscation and Second Amendment repeal, which, if you’ve read my article telling you about such a goal, would not be effective whatsoever.

They push for gun control as often as they possibly can, pointing to places like the U.K. and Australia which have implemented it and gun crime is not very high. I would like to counter that by pointing out places like Chicago, Jamaica and Honduras. All places with very strict gun control laws and all places with very high murder rates and gun crime rates.

My point is that gun control hasn’t affected the crime rates in any of the countries in any positive way. That is another piece of evidence that should convince people (though it likely won’t) that what counts is the culture in a nation, not the gun laws.

Not to mention that the U.S. has the most guns per 100 residents out of any country. And it’s not even close. According to the Small Arms Survey, the amount of guns owned per 100 residents is 88.8. Serbia comes at #2 with 58.21 and Yemen at #3 with 54.8.

Yet, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the U.S. murder rate sits at just 4.88%. There are over 90 other countries with worse rates and less guns (as we can see from the previous stat). Not to mention that there are severe population differences between the U.S., the U.K. and Australia (and the other countries).

We have the most guns out of all of these countries, the most people out of these countries, but are still among the safest in the world, particularly when accounting for our massive population.

I’ve said this before, but I’ll say it again: if guns were the issue, everyone would knowit.

But guns aren’t the issue. Not that the Left would ever admit that. They hate guns and hate the fact that people can own them. Wayne LaPierre has it exactly right when he says they hate individual freedom.

Guns provide the people with freedom from the government. A concept that sounds like blasphemy in the ears of the Left.

As a side note, I find it rich that the very people that have called Trump “Hitler” are also the ones demanding he take away people’s guns.

1 Peter 5:8“Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.”

Brian Williams (Left) interviewing Florida high school student after shooting

I’ve said this many times before, but this is a conversation that always goes around in circles anyway: gun control doesn’t work. And even a high school student from the very school that was the target of Nikolas Cruz believes gun control doesn’t work.

MSNBC host Brian Williams (yes, the same one that can’t tell the truth to save his life) interviewed a couple of the students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.

Williams asked one of them about the shooting suspect, with him replying that he had a couple of classes with Nikolas but never really associated with him until he was paired with him on a school project. Brandon, the student being interviewed, said that Nikolas told Brandon about how he had gotten expelled from “two different private schools, he was held back twice, he had aspirations to join the military and he enjoyed hunting.”

Williams then mentioned how Cruz left evidence behind on his social media pointing to the eventual shooting and he was the kind of person you’d usually leave alone.

Brandon replied how he “always thought that he was unusual and strange; always sat alone, twiddling his thumbs; keeping to himself, laugh at himself.”

From Brandon’s account, we can see some signs of mental instability. And when Williams asked Brandon how he felt when he had learned that it was Cruz who committed this heinous crime, Brandon said that he “wasn’t surprised, but it was kind of unfortunate to hear.”

Then, Williams gets to the political side of the issue. He asks Brandon that if he were “a lawmaker in a decision-making position, how would you stop… the kind of thing that happened today? A kid who had been thrown out, comes back with a weapon and takes out whatever grievance he’s been walking around with in his head?”

In other words, he asked Brandon whether he would push for gun control or not. This is what Brandon replies with: “Gun-wise, I don’t think there’s any way to prevent it. If you outlaw guns, it just creates a higher demand for it. I think it has to do with mental health. If he’s been expelled three different times in three different schools, I think he should be helped out.”

How is it that a high school student from a school that was the target of a mass shooting is more cognizant of the ineffectiveness of gun control than politicians and the Left?

While the Left makes the same expected push for gun control, brings up tons of made up statistics, such as “there have been 18 school shootings in 2018,” which even the Washington Post debunks as “flat wrong”, Brandon here understands that the issue is not with guns. And while I wrote an article saying that the issue is with the hearts of people, it’s also important to note that the issue also lies in the minds of people.

Brandon details a kid with some obvious signs of mental instability. And the fact that Cruz had been kicked out of multiple schools in a short amount of time indicates the fact that Cruz needed help and urgently.

He understands that, had Cruz gotten some help, the likelihood of him shooting up the school and mass murdering 17 of his former classmates would’ve severely decreased. And if he was determined enough to shoot up the school, I think he would’ve been determined enough to procure a weapon no matter what the law says.

Which is why I roll my eyes every time some idiot Leftist or supposed media “conservative” says we should repeal the second amendment. Let me tell you, even if the 2nd Amendment were to be repealed and all registered guns were confiscated in America, shootings would still happen and in even higher rates.

And say, for example, that the government confiscated ALL guns, both registered and unregistered, the problem wouldn’t be solved, only delayed. And how is delaying these things any better? Mexican cartels would still bring guns into America, at even higher rates under this hypothesis. As Brandon said, outlawing guns only creates a higher demand for it. So there would be more demand for guns in the country and no repeal and confiscation would even come close to solving this problem.

The Left never thinks things through and is never realistic. Think of it this way. Weed is illegal in most states. In those states, police sometimes find any amount of weed on someone. Despite the fact that weed is illegal, these people still have some, however small the amount may be. They still have it despite the fact that weed can not be legally sold and possessed there (at least without a medicinal marijuana license).

Now, replace the word “weed” in that example with the word “gun”. Do you see where the problem is? Even with a full repeal of the 2nd Amendment and total confiscation of all guns in the U.S., people will still find a way to procure one or more.

And that’s the major reason why gun control doesn’t work. Gun control only applies to those who follow the law and the ones who follow the law tend not to be the ones shooting up schools, churches, theaters and such.

So focusing on gun control, the NRA and these things only detracts from the real issue at hand. The NRA is the only organization in the world that gets blamed for things that their members didn’t do. The NRA is painted as child-killers by the same people that support abortion. Painted as controlling bureaucrats with money despite the fact that Planned Parenthood donates far more money to politicians than the NRA does.

The NRA is not the culprit here. The AR-15 used in this shooting was not the culprit here. The manufacturers who made the gun are not the culprits here. The culprit here is Nikolas Cruz, mainly, but also the school system’s failure to help out a child who clearly needed help and the FBI’s failure to collect the clear evidence left behind by Cruz on social media and instead focusing on destroying a duly-elected President.

What we need is not a change in our gun laws (if anything, guns should be made more readily available). What we need is a change in culture. A change in people’s hearts. A change in people’s minds. I won’t go too much into detail here since I’ve already written an article on how we can prevent most mass shootings, but that’s where the answer to these tragedies lie.

Laws don’t change people’s hearts and minds. Christ does.

John 16:33“I have said these things to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world.”

We’ve gotten to the point where Leftists are literally condemning Trump for deciding to give food to poor people.

President Trump, in his budget proposal this past week, came up with a neat little idea: let’s give people food instead of food stamps. The reason for this is that the food stamp system is often times abused (there have been reports of scams and fraud) and people will usually use it to buy junk food instead of healthy food.

And since this is a plan proposed by Trump, the Left decides it’s a terrible idea and it shouldn’t be implemented.

According to the Daily Wire, the Huffington Post viewed the idea this way: “Facing a trillion-dollar deficit because of his just-passed tax cuts, President Donald Trump has an idea for how to get some of that money back: making poor people eat beans and rice.”

You gotta love the way these lunatics phrase things. First of all, the deficit isn’t due to the tax cuts. According to the U.S. Treasury Department’s Monthly Treasury Statement, the federal government made more in taxes in the first four months of the fiscal year than any other year, it broke the January record for tax collection and is at a $49 billion surplus, having collected $361 billion and spending approximately $312 billion.

So the tax cuts are helping the government MAKE MORE MONEY! Of course, that’s a concept that no liberal understands, so I can excuse this HuffPost writer’s ignorance.

But the financial aspects of this proposal are not the only thing I want to focus on. The HuffPost writer also made it seem that the government is trying to be greedy and is literally forcing poor people to eat beans and rice.

When I first read that, the image I received was that of a typical greedy fat-cat force-feeding beans and rice to a poor person. I can only imagine that’s the exact picture other people had in their minds. But, as usual, reality is far different from what the Left makes it seem.

Second, it’s not just “beans and rice”. The USDA would have a package that contains “shelf-stable milk, ready to eat cereals, pasta, peanut butter, beans and canned fruits and vegetables,” according to the budget deal.This writer makes it seem as though Trump is this close to literally feeding dirt and mud to poor people.

But that’s not the most ridiculous statement coming from the Left on this issue, if you can believe it.

NPR also talked about it and here’s that they said: “The USDA believes that state governments will be able to deliver this food at much less cost than SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) recipients currently pay for food at retail stores – thus reducing the overall cost of the SNAP program by $129 billion over the next 10 years. This and other changes in the SNAP program, according to the Trump administration, will reduce the SNAP budget by $213 billion over those years – cutting the program by almost 30 percent.”

Wait, here comes the funny part: “Joel Berg, CEO of Hunger Free America, a hunger advocacy group that also helps clients access food-assistance services, said the administration’s plan left him baffled. ‘They have managed to propose nearly the impossible, taking over $200 billion worth of food from low-income Americans while increasing bureaucracy and reducing choices,’ Berg says. He says SNAP is efficient because it is a ‘free market model’ that lets recipients shop at stores for their benefits. The Trump administration’s proposal, he said, ‘is a far more intrusive, Big Government answer. They think a bureaucrat in D.C. is better at picking out what your family needs than you are?’”

SO NOW THEY’RE CLAIMING IT INCREASES THE SIZE OF THE GOVERNMENT?! The Trump Derangement Syndrome might be under full effect for these people. Since when does the Left care at all about a free market system? THEY HATE FREE MARKETS! They are the ones constantly increasing the size of the government!

In 2009, when Obama took office, there were 33.5 million people on food stamps.In October of 2016, that number reached 44.2 million – a 10.7 million people increase. The cost of the programs to taxpayers increased from $50.3 billion to $66.6 billion. Obama did what Leftists tend to do: make people poor and dependent on the government.

To put more people on food stamps would be to increase the government. To give people under that program actually healthy food is not. And considering this plan would CUT funding for the program, it’s actually DECREASING the size of the government.

And since Trump took office, nearly 1.5 million people have gotten off of food stamps, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. A 3.5% drop.

And it’s not just the actual program that you have to consider when discussing this plan. Unemployment rates are also something to consider. If more people are working, less people will require government assistance. Part of the reason for the aforementioned number is that the unemployment rate has truly been dropping (unlike during Obama’s tenure when it only dropped because more people stopped looking for jobs, even though they should still have counted as unemployed).

When the economy is truly booming, people tend to notice. And when the economy is truly booming, less people feel the need to request help from the government. Which is precisely why Democrats LOATHE a truly booming economy.

Democrats need a consistently poor base. Since their previous American base is now doing better thanks to Trump’s booming economy, they are now largely seeking to import a base.

They need people to be poor for them to be successful. And that’s not happening in Trump’s economy. Heck, if approval numbers are anything to go by (which they usually aren’t, but it’s important to make note of this), then more and more people are approving of Trump’s job than they did before. According to a Politico poll, 47% of voters approve of his job performance, while 47% disapprove.

That’s a number no one in the media expected to see and a number no one in the media wants to see/report. I don’t tend to give too much credibility to polls in general, but it’s noteworthy to see polls that show these kinds of numbers. Since the Left lives and dies by the polls, these numbers can only infuriate them.

More and more people are beginning to approve of Trump’s performance as POTUS, so Democrats have to go with people that think the same things they do. People who hate Trump and hate America and believe they’re entitled to abuse our economic system.

But returning to the proposition by Trump, I’m honestly very bemused that the Left is opposed to this and even more bemused with their arguments against it.

You know what a good free market system would be for these poor people? Getting a job, which, in Trump’s economy, it’s becoming easier to do.

Acts 20:35“In all things I have shown you that by working hard in this way we must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how He Himself said, ‘it is more blessed to give than to receive.’”

February is widely known as Black History Month. A month when people honor African-Americans who have sought and/or achieved to make great strides towards making all people equal under the law regardless of race. But today’s Leftists miss that point entirely.

Recently, the Boston Police Department tweeted this: “In honor of #BlackHistoryMonth we pay tribute to @celtics legend #RedAuerbach for being the 1st @NBA coach to draft a black player in 1950, field an all African-American starting five in 1964 and hire the league’s 1st African-American head coach (Bill Russell) in 1966.”

Of course, Leftists on social media were outraged that the BPD would honor a white man during Black History Month. Now do you see how they entirely miss the point people like Dr. King strived to make?

They are prioritizing Auerbach’s skin color over the content of his character and his actions. Red Auerbach drafted Bill Russell in 1956, being the first coach to do so. However, Russell was not the first African-American man to play in the NBA. That honor belongs to three other people: Earl Lloyd (who was the first African-American to play in an actual NBA game), Chuck Cooper and Nathaniel Clifton who were all drafted in 1950.

From the tweet, we can see the great help Red Auerbach was to African-Americans in the NBA. As early as the 2015-16 NBA season, The Institute for Diversity and Ethnics in Sport (TIDES) of the University of Central Florida recorded that the NBA was 18.3% white, with this number including non-American whites such as Dirk Nowitzki and Kristaps Porzingis.

The NBA being mostly black is not surprising but a large reason it’s the way it is at this point in time is because of people like Red Auerbach and Walter A. Brown, who saw potential in players like Cooper and Russell, not skin color.

And remember, this is in the 1950’s and early 60’s. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was still a ways away from this and I remember reading that Bill Russell told stories about being discriminated against by hotel owners and restaurants whenever the team was travelling to away games.

So despite the great importance Red Auerbach was to African-Americans in the NBA, Leftists are more concerned with the fact that he was white and he’s being honored during Black History Month.

Not to equate him to Lincoln, but would it also be outrageous to honor Abraham Lincoln during Black History Month despite the GREAT things he did for African-Americans in the country? Would the fact that he was white diminish his actions or made them worthless?

Of course not, yet Leftists miss the point entirely. Eventually, the BPD was forced to apologize after comments made by idiots, including Boston City Counselor Tito Jackson, who said: “Only in Boston do the Boston Police honor Red Auerbach for Black History Month. So we already have the shortest month and now this.” “Please file this under Hell Nah aka Not Having it aka Not Ok…”

The BPD apologized by saying: “BPD realizes that an earlier tweet may have offended some and we apologize for that. Our intentions were never to offend. It has been taken down.”

And even the apology gets attacked: “This is a bad apology. You should say why black history is important and why a police department should be hyper-cognizant of that,” wrote one user.

Typical Leftist telling people what they “should” do. What the BPD “should” do is not give a damn what these sensitive little wusses think and honor someone WHO HAS HELPED AFRICAN-AMERICANS A GREAT DEAL DESPITE THE FACT THAT HE IS WHITE!

Another lunatic wrote: “This wasn’t an honest mistake, it was an idiotic move by a group clearly unconcerned and unfamiliar with anyone who’s not white.” You can’t see it, but his profile picture is that of a white guy. By his logic, isn’t he also unfamiliar with anyone who’s not white? By his logic, he doesn’t “understand the constant struggle non-whites go through.”

The BPD is literally honoring someone who helped black people in his sport. Only in Leftist America could that possibly be offensive and wrong.

And the funny thing is that it’s not really surprising. The Left has always hated anyone who’s not white and attacked those who helped black people. In a sense, these Leftists are doing on Twitter what the KKK did in their time.They’re harassing and(at least verbally)assaulting those helpful and supportive of black people.

By attacking the BPD for honoring a white man, these lunatics show themselves to be the racists that they truly are. They don’t care what Red did. They care that he was white and they care that he’s being honored during Black History Month.

Frankly, the BPD is more progressive (as in actually forward-thinking, not communist) than those who attack them. They see what Red did for African-Americans in the NBA and honor his actions, ignoring the fact that he was white because that fact is entirely irrelevant. It’s these “progressive” social justice warriors who should apologize and be ashamed of themselves.

They’re the ones who are being insensitive here. So we shouldn’t honor white people who helped black people? We should only honor black people who helped black people? That’s what I mean when I say they miss Dr. King’s message.

His message was that of hope for the future. That his children would live in a world where they wouldn’t be judged by the color of their skin, but be judged by the content of their characters. And yet, these lunatic social justice warriors decide to focus on Red’s skin color rather than what he did for African-Americans. And they choose to attack the BPD for doing something that’s right.

Hatred simply lives and thrives in the Left’s heart. Whether it’s hatred for black people, white people, it doesn’t matter. Ironically, their hatred is less racist than they are.

Galatians 3:28“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

​During the first few days of the Winter Olympics in South Korea, Kim Jong-un’s sister, Kim Yo-jong, was in attendance and, according to multiple MSM sources, she “stole the show away from VP Mike Pence”, who was also in attendance.

The New York Times writes: “Kim Jong-un’s Sister Turns On The Charm, Taking Pence’s Spotlight.” Yes, that was the title of their article.

The article says that news outlets in the South instantly called her “’North Korea’s Ivanka,’ likening her influence to that of Ivanka Trump on her father, President Trump.”

If she has any sort of influence on the insane, murderous dictator, she must not be a very good influence.

Of course, this article manages to sidle up to the North Korean regime and slam the President at the same time.

“Flashing a sphinx-like smile and without ever speaking in public, Ms. Kim managed to outflank Mr. Trump’s envoy to the Olympics, Vice President Mike Pence, in the game of diplomatic image-making.”

We can see the Left is salivating over some sort of North Korean “victory” over the U.S. and the media will go to any length to look for it.

“While Mr. Pence came with an old message – that the United States would continue to ratchet up ‘maximum sanctions’ until the North dismantled its nuclear arsenal – Ms. Kim delivered messages of reconciliation as well as an unexpected invitation from her brother to the South Korean president, Moon Jae-in, to visit Pyongyang, the North Korean capital.”

A message of reconciliation? How exactly does what she did offer such a thing? “Hey, South Korea, I know that we’ve been threatening you guys with nukes for decades and have often sought to start a third World War and that anyone in North Korea, including myself, is subject to execution at the mere whim of the Supreme Leader, but let’s just forget the decades of atrocities my country has committed to its own people and the South Koreans we abduct at the border. Water under the bridge, eh?”

Give me a break.

Besides, let's face it - the ONLY reason North Korea wanted to team up with South Korea for these Games is it's the ONLY way North Korea would be applauded AT ALL!!. South Koreans were applauding their OWN athletes! If North Korean athletes had walked on their own, what do you think might have happened? Maybe they might have gotten booed? North Korea clearly didn't want to take any chances and the South fell for it.

Then, the article goes on to further attack Pence, saying: “And while the unified Korean Olympic team received a standing ovation as they marched into the stadium Friday night, Mr. Pence remained seated, which critics said was disrespectful of the athletes and his host, Mr. Moon.”

Since when does the MSM care if someone stands and applauds for someone or something? During the State of the Union address they certainly didn’t care that Democrats didn’t stand for black unemployment being at an all-time low. They didn’t stand for the economy growing at unprecedented rates. They didn’t stand to honor the families of children slain by members of MS-13. But they care that Pence didn’t stand to applaud the Korean Olympic team?

Why would he? Who roots for a competing country in such an event? He wants American Olympians to win the gold. He roots for Team USA. Despite the fact that we’re allied with the South, why would we root for them to beat our guys? This is a COMPETITION!

But you see, he doesn’t stand for something he didn’t have to stand for and the Left attacks him. Meanwhile, Democrats don’t stand for something every red-blooded American should stand for and the media doesn’t bat an eyelid.

The article then quotes a University of Connecticut professor (because the Left believes these people to be the smartest in the world): “I think it would have been really helpful to the conversation of denuclearization for the Pences to have appreciated the effort put into bringing team unified Korea into the stadium. And it wouldn’t have lessened the American position.” So standing for that team would’ve gotten Little Rocket Man to denuclearize his country? You have to have a childish ambition and imagination to believe such a thing would happen.

But the professor’s not done. She (the professor is a woman) then said: “The fact that he and Mrs. Pence didn’t stand when the unified team came in was a new low in a bullying type of American diplomacy.”

Seriously? Not standing is considered bullying now? Then care to explain the continuous bullying from the Democrats for not standing for anything that is Making America Great Again? By this logic, weren’t the Democrats bullying Trump?

You really have to have a victim mentality to believe such inaction to be considered “bullying”.

The article then continued to praise Kim Jong-un’s sister (a phrase I can’t believe I’m actually saying): “Her quietly friendly approach while in South Korea… seemed to endear her to some observers.”

And it’s not until plenty late in the article that the New York Times casually mentions the brutality of the North Korean regime: “Others said they were horrified by the notion that Ms. Kim could lull South Koreans, or anyone else, into forgetting the North’s repression and human rights abuses.”

It’s not abuse of human rights. It’s ANNIHILATION of human rights. The people of North Korea have no human rights. Any sort of misstep on their part that serves to piss off anyone with any sort of power will result in that person’s imprisonment, forced labor and potential execution.

The people of North Korea have no rights, thanks to the communist regime. If any moronic liberal wants to see what full-on communism looks like, I’d be happy to point them to North Korea. That is full-on communism.

A place where people are not people is a place ruled by communism. The people of North Korea are not people – they’re slaves to the communist regime. They may not don metal chains, but they don mental chains. Emotional chains. Psychological chains. Legal chains.

They are bound to communism not just by the law of North Korea but by the state of mind of the people.

I doubt if North Korea were to make a 180 degree turn to capitalism that the people would know what to do. They have no idea what being free means. For generations, these people have lived under the worst form of communism. The people belong to the state, not to themselves.

So then, I must ask, are you really so surprised that the MSM would side with the North Koreans over America? After all, they ignore the fact that Kim Jong-un was the one who threatened us first and blame rising tensions on Trump as though he is the one who made the first threat.

Another Leftist media source, ThinkProgress already misquotes Trump’s speech at the U.N., saying that he vowed to “totally destroy” North Korea. They willingly ignore the part where Trump said he would totally destroy North Korea “if [America] is forced to defend itself or its allies.”

He wasn’t making a threat to North Korea. He was making a promise. If they attack first, there will be no more North Korea. But the Left is making him out to be the dangerous lunatic going around threatening people.

Again, are you surprised the Left supports North Korea? KIM IS EXACTLY WHAT THE LEFT WANTS TO BE IN AMERICA! The Left would KILL to get the power Kim Jong-un has. They dream of being able to turn America into a completely communist nation.

A nation that owns its people. A nation where the people belong to the state. That’s exactly what the Democrats want and even showed in an ad during the 2012 election, where the narrator said: “the government is the only thing we all belong to.”

The funny thing is that Mussolini said something very similar in the book La Dottrina del Fascismo: “All is in the state and nothing human exists or has value outside the state.”

That’s the reality Mussolini lived in. That’s the reality Kim Jong-un lives in. And that’s the reality that the Democrats, as evidenced by the campaign ad, want to live in.

One last time. Are you really so surprised that the Left favors the evil communist North Korean regime over the good capitalist American nation?

Revelation 21:8“But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.”

Let me make that title a little bit more clear. If you’re a Christian, there’s no reason to not support what Trump stands for. Even if you were to have a problem with his character (which there’s really no reason to have such a problem), then that’s fine. You may not like him personally, but you also have to realize that he’s leagues better than just about anyone in Washington when it comes to character, not to mention ideals.

But you may be asking, why am I writing about this? Well, I was looking through some conservative websites recently and came across an article written by Dennis Prager titled: “In Defense Of Evangelicals Who Support Trump”.

That title got me thinking. “Why would he need to defend evangelicals who support Trump? If you’re a Christian, it only makes sense to support him or at least prefer him over the scum of the Earth known as the Washington Establishment.”

And so, I got to reading. In his article, he mentions a number of evangelical Christians who refuse to support Trump, not because of his policies or ideas for this country, but because of the content of his character.

Prager mentions a mere few. Ross Douthat, a columnist for the New York Times (of course, he writes for the MSM), wrote: “Whether the subject is the debauched pagan in the White House, the mall-haunted candidacy of Roy Moore or the larger question of how to engage with secular culture, there is talk of an intergenerational crisis within evangelical churches, a widening disillusionment with a Trump-endorsing old guard, a feeling that a crack up must loom ahead.”

Debauched pagan? What in the world are you talking about? What has he said or done to make you think he’s a debauched pagan? If you’re referring to the Access Hollywood tape, is that really all you can point to to make this claim? I can tell you that he’s said the word “God” more often than he’s said “p***y”.

Besides, who are you to be pointing out the splinter in his eye? Are you not a sinner? Are you as righteous as Christ Himself? Have you never had a sinful thought or desire? If you claim to not be a sinner, then I can’t tell you you’re much of a Christian.

Besides, who else would you rather support? Hillary? A woman who’s happily and knowingly defended a child rapist? A woman who’s MARRIED to a rapist and defends him whenever she must? A woman who would attack the women her husband’s defiled against their will? A woman who had to cheat in an election just to end up losing it?

Linda Sarsour? A woman who believes a hijab “empowers” women? Bernie Sanders? A man who openly believes in socialism and wants this country to turn into Venezuela? Obama? A man who’s spent 8 years in the White House turning every government department into a political weapon to be used against conservatives?

All of these people are AGAINST CHRISTIANITY! Against everything Christians stand for! We stand for the right to life. The right to worship our Lord openly and peacefully. The right to speak our minds.

They don’t even stand for black unemployment being at an all-time low!

Tell me, then. Who would you rather be running this country? The people that will work to utterly transform it away from its CHRISTIAN founding or the people that understand who we are, what we stand for as a nation and will work to Make America Great Again?

Trump isn’t perfect. No one other than Christ who’s walked the Earth has been perfect. But there are clearly better people and worse people. Good people and evil people. To not support someone who’s literally risking his life, reputation and popularity with the world in order to do what’s right and good is to side with evil.

And that’s just one of the people Prager quotes. He also quotes Jared Wilson of The Gospel Coalition. “From the same believers who raised us to believe that standing for the truth was more important than anything, that being persecuted for your integrity was better than compromise, that morality was not relative, that ethics are not situational. And now these same teachers are wanting us to believe that a little ‘R’ by a man’s name covers a multitude of sins.”

All of the things he mentioned – from believing that standing for the truth was more important than anything to everything else in that quote about priorities – does that not sound like it would describe Trump?

Does Trump not stand for the truth? HE EXPOSES THE LEFT ALMOST EVERY DAY FOR THE LIES THEY SPEW! He’s being persecuted for his integrity, is he not? He’s solidly conservative, is he not? His morality has not skewed depending on the situation, has it?

A little “R” next to his name is not the reason I support him. Had he run as a Democrat (probably would’ve lost for more than one reason), I would’ve still been inclined to support him. I would’ve had my doubts about him actually wanting to do the things he wanted, yes. I tend not to trust what Democrats say. But his message was far more conservative than anyone in the Democrat Party would ever offer. More conservative than even many Republicans!

Jared believes the only reason people like us support Trump is because he’s a Republican. To believe that is to be naïve and, frankly, thinking with a Leftist mindset.

He says the letter “R” next to his name supposedly covers a multitude of sins. And while I do believe Trump’s a sinner just as much as we all are, no one is making the claim that we should give him a break because he’s a Republican.

I don’t give any Republican a break if they don’t support the MAGA agenda. Because those people tend not to be the kind of people a Christian would want running the country!

Besides, what does it matter if he’s a sinner? Aside from the fact that we are all sinners, why does that matter?Historically, God has a tendency of choosing sinners to follow His commandments and be great Biblical heroes.

Noah got drunk and committed incest with his daughters (though his daughters are the ones who got him drunk and slept with him).

Abraham lied about his wife Sarah being his sister, slept with a woman who was not his wife and had a child with her simply because he couldn’t wait for God to give him a child; Jacob was a deceiver; Moses murdered an Egyptian; Rahab was a prostitute; Samson was lustful and angry; David committed adultery; Paul persecuted and EXECUTED Christ’s followers and Peter thrice denied Christ.

Everyone in the Bible, except for God, His Son Jesus and the Holy Spirit was a sinner in his or her own right. Everyone in HISTORY is a sinner in his or her own right.

Yet, all of the aforementioned people are regarded as great Biblical heroes. As great followers of God, and that, they were. So when someone with Trump’s vision comes along and works hard every day to Make America Great Again and, even if he won’t downright say it, Make America Blessed By God Again, why attack him? Why despise him? Why side with EVIL?!

I’m not saying Trump’s flawless. Of course he’s not. But he’s exponentially better than just about everyone in the government right now. He’s certainly better than Cryin’ Chuck and Apocalypse Nancy.

Would you rather support any of these guys? Are they not sinners as well? Do they not have character flaws as well?

To expect someone to come along and be as sin-free as Christ was and wait for him to run for office is ridiculous. No mortal being will ever be free of sin. Only Christ ever was. And Christ isn’t going to come down from Heaven and start running for office.

If that’s what these so-called evangelicals are waiting for, they’ll be waiting all the way to Rapture.

Daniel 2:21“It is He who changes the times and the epochs; He removes kings and establishes kings; He gives wisdom to wise men And knowledge to men of understanding.”